Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1texts which speak of difference. We therefore look on the relation of the highest Self and the soul as analogous to that of the snake and its coils. Viewed as a whole the snake is one, non-different, while an element of difference appears if we view it with regard to its coils, hood, erect posture and so on. 28. Or else like that of light to its substratum, both beinor fire. Or else the relation of the two may be viewed as follows. Just as the light of the sun and its substratum, i.e. the sun himself, are not absolutely different — for they both consist of fire — and yet are spoken of as different, so also the soul and the highest Self. 29. Or else (the relation of the two is to be conceived) in the manner stated above.
2Or else the relation of the two has to be conceived in the manner suggested by Sutra 25. For if the bondage of the soul is due to Nescience only, final release is possible. But if the soul is really and truly bound — whether the soul be considered as a certain condition or state of the highest Self as suggested in Sutra 27, or as a part of the highest Self as suggested in Sutra 28 — its real bondage cannot be done away with, and thus the scriptural doctrine of final release becomes absurd. — Nor, finally, can it be said that Sruti equally teaches difference and non-difference. For non-difference only is what it aims at establishing ; while, when engaged in setting forth something else, it merely refers to difference as something known from other sources of knowledge (viz. perception, &c.). — Hence the conclusion stands that the soul is not different from the highest Self, as explained in Sutra 25. 30. And on account of the denial. The conclusion arrived at above is confirmed by the fact of scripture expressly denying that there exists any intelligent being apart from the highest Self. Cp. ' There is no other seer but he' (Bri. Up. Ill, 7, 23). And the same in ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 3 1. I 75
3conclusion follows from those passages which deny the existence of a world apart from Brahman and thus leave Brahman alone remaining, viz. ' Now then the teaching, Not so, not so!' (Brz. Up. II, 3, 6); 'That Brahman is without cause and without effect, without anything inside or outside^ (Bri. Up. II, 5, 19). 31. Beyond (Brahman, there is something) further, on account of the designations of bank, measure, connexion, separation. With reference to this Brahman which we have ascertained to be free from all plurality there now arises the doubt — due to the conflicting nature of various scriptural statements — whether something exists beyond it or not. We therefore enter on the task of explaining the true meaning of those scriptural passages which seem to indicate that there is some entity beyond, i.e. apart from Brahman.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1texts which speak of difference. We therefore look on the relation of the highest Self and the soul as analogous to that of the snake and its coils. Viewed as a whole the snake is one, non-different, while an element of difference appears if we view it with regard to its coils, hood, erect posture and so on. 28. Or else like that of light to its substratum, both beinor fire. Or else the relation of the two may be viewed as follows. Just as the light of the sun and its substratum, i.e. the sun himself, are not absolutely different — for they both consist of fire — and yet are spoken of as different, so also the soul and the highest Self. 29. Or else (the relation of the two is to be conceived) in the manner stated above.
2Or else the relation of the two has to be conceived in the manner suggested by Sutra 25. For if the bondage of the soul is due to Nescience only, final release is possible. But if the soul is really and truly bound — whether the soul be considered as a certain condition or state of the highest Self as suggested in Sutra 27, or as a part of the highest Self as suggested in Sutra 28 — its real bondage cannot be done away with, and thus the scriptural doctrine of final release becomes absurd. — Nor, finally, can it be said that Sruti equally teaches difference and non-difference. For non-difference only is what it aims at establishing ; while, when engaged in setting forth something else, it merely refers to difference as something known from other sources of knowledge (viz. perception, &c.). — Hence the conclusion stands that the soul is not different from the highest Self, as explained in Sutra 25. 30. And on account of the denial. The conclusion arrived at above is confirmed by the fact of scripture expressly denying that there exists any intelligent being apart from the highest Self. Cp. ' There is no other seer but he' (Bri. Up. Ill, 7, 23). And the same in ADHYAYA, 2 PADA, 3 1. I 75
3conclusion follows from those passages which deny the existence of a world apart from Brahman and thus leave Brahman alone remaining, viz. ' Now then the teaching, Not so, not so!' (Brz. Up. II, 3, 6); 'That Brahman is without cause and without effect, without anything inside or outside^ (Bri. Up. II, 5, 19). 31. Beyond (Brahman, there is something) further, on account of the designations of bank, measure, connexion, separation. With reference to this Brahman which we have ascertained to be free from all plurality there now arises the doubt — due to the conflicting nature of various scriptural statements — whether something exists beyond it or not. We therefore enter on the task of explaining the true meaning of those scriptural passages which seem to indicate that there is some entity beyond, i.e. apart from Brahman.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.